Jan
18

Saving Country Music’s Official Stance on SOPA (A Rant)

January 18, 2012 - By Trigger  //  Random Notes  //  58 Comments

As you probably have noticed, the internet today is all agog over this proposed legislation called SOPA, or the Stop Online Piracy Act. I’ll spare you the details, you can find them many places online if you wish. What I want to deal with is the propaganda being perpetuated by the opponents of this legislation, and to explain how I would react even if this law was passed, and all of the propaganda was true.

Right now it is extremely popular for blog sites like this one to be adamantly opposed to SOPA, and to help spread the “message” of what the law “might” do. You will find it difficult to impossible to find a site like this that is off-message, but Saving Country Music is one of them. Make no mistake, I know this will not be an unpopular stance, but I do not run a fucking popularity contest, I run a website where I’ve promised to my readers that I will be as honest with them as I can be at all times.

The official Saving Country Music stance on SOPA is that I am vaguely opposed to some elements of the legislation that may have unintended consequences. But Saving Country Music is NOT participating in the internet blackout, and I will NOT be signing any petition.

Let me reassure you that Saving Country Music would not be censored by SOPA, or any other law for that matter, not because a law may or may not have provisions that may attempt to censor this site, but because I would not allow that to happen. Rich people in suits 3000 miles away can not, and will not censor me. The only thing that would censor me would be a bullet in my fucking head, and that’s not grandstanding. The right to free speech is worth dying for, and I would be honored to die for it. Especially since my death, as it would anyone’s willing to die for free speech, would do nothing but rally my cause, and spread my subversive message more than I ever could alive.

If Saving Country Music was censored, I would move the site to an offshore server. If the offshore server was shut down, I would write my blogs out long hand and broadcast them through a bullhorn on street corners. If I was sued, I wouldn’t pay. If people trespassed on my property to seize assets or arrest me, I would shoot them. If I was shot and killed in retaliation, I will have died for a good cause. So their stupid fucking laws and whatever consequences they may or may not entail are completely inconsequential to me.

And don’t bother me with your propaganda or plastic banana causes; I’m too busy writing. Though I may identify more with the opposition of SOPA than the proponents, the lies being spread by some SOPA opponents, saying how the whole web is going to be censored and entire sects of it will disappear is absolute fucking nonsensical bullshit. It is LIES and FEAR and PROPAGANDA meant to polarize.

The point of the SOPA opposition propaganda is no different than any other propaganda. It is meant to engage and polarize the public so that money continues to flood into the political industrial complex to prop up the political industry’s infrastructure and executive salaries. Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, and all the other entities that have banded together to oppose this legislation should be fucking ashamed of themselves for spreading lies and fear, and resorting to guerrilla, pop-social tactics to spread a “hey ninny ninny the sky is falling” message that creates a “boy cried wolf” mentality in the mainstream public, and whose “unintended consequence” will be the ignoring of future actions when there actually is something significant at stake, just like how the perpetual “Occupy” protests accomplished diluting the effectiveness of protesting itself.

Make no fucking mistake about it, Google and Facebook’s fight is not about censorship, it is about MONEY, no different than it is for SOPA proponents. Unlike many of the millions who have signed petitions against SOPA because it was cool, I have actually read the law, and followed the story from the beginning, and have kept up on the updates and amendments to it. Nowhere in the current SOPA legislation is there any wording, directly or indirectly, that talks about censoring anything, and furthermore, the US government does not have jurisdiction over offshore servers even if it did, which is the reason legislation like this was deemed necessary by some in the first place.

The penalty trigger that would be enacted if websites were found to be engaging in piracy of one form or another would be to shut off the revenue from ads, many of which are administrated by Google. That is why Google, and sites like Facebook who rely on ad revenue from Google, are so opposed to SOPA. For example, The Pirate Bay works from an offshore server. They don’t make any money distributing copyrighted material, they make money off of Google ads. The idea with SOPA is to cut off The Pirate Bay’s revenue stream through Google, and hope they will whither on the vine.

Saving Country Music has the same type of Google ads that The Pirate Bay, Facebook, and many other sites do. If the Google ads were removed, which would be the strongest penalty the SOPA law would be allowed to enact, then guess what would happen: nothing. I write about music because I love it. Not from the pennies I get from Google clicks. In fact losing the Google ads might be a good thing, because it may motivate me to spend more time looking for independent sponsors.

On January 13th, the portion of SOPA that required ISP’s to restrict access to sites that were deemed to have pirated material was taken out of the bill. In other words, even sites who exclusively deal in pirated material, like The Pirate Bay, etc., would still be up, and by law, could still be seen by users. The only thing that would be restricted would be payments to and from advertisers like Google. The people spoke, and for once, Congress listened. But Google/Facebook is still going with their original propaganda argument as if the bill was never changed. If the ISP restriction provision was still in the bill, I would have participated in the blackout.

If you want to find someone to be angry with, in my opinion, you should be angry with The Pirate Bay and other sites like it, and the assholes that keep them in business by stealing copyrighted material. To the detriment of Saving Country Music and my own personal enjoyment, I have never, NEVER downloaded even one piece of pirated music. I am not necessarily even opposed to the practice, but many sites and fans have taken it way too far, fully knowing there would be consequences to pay at some point down the road. Are some of those consequences embodied in SOPA? Maybe, but they are mild at best. Hey, I hate the music industry as much as anyone, but the assholes who perpetually steal copyrighted material and self-righteously justify it by saying the artists don’t get any money for it anyway is the direct cause of the SOPA legislation.

Another issue here is that I have very little faith in this legislation passing. As everyone wants to blame this side, or that side of the political isle for their own personal problems, or blame Bush or Obama, right under our noses, the greatest obstructionist in the history of The United States of America, Harry Reed, has been killing all manner of legislation to perpetually save issues for upcoming political seasons stretching now into two decades. All the more reason to flip the bird to the whole political process, which this SOPA law, AND the SOPA opposition propaganda machine are intrinsically a part of.

Do I have some problems with the SOPA legislation? Yes. Do I hope it passes? No. But I would be fucking embarrassed to be part of this bullshit propaganda pop culture mob mentality lie machine being perpetuated on the internet right now by big name internet franchises.

Quit waiting for laws being passed thousands of miles away to effect you. Nothing is more oppressive then the restrictions we all put on ourselves every day. Don’t allow yourself to be lied to, make up your own mind. These are my opinions, and that’s all they are. My suggestion is not for you to follow them, but to become informed, and make your opinions about SOPA for yourself.

As for me, I’ll worry about it when the men with guns arrive. Until then, it is irrelevant.

58 Comments to “Saving Country Music’s Official Stance on SOPA (A Rant)”

  • Sounds a little bit like the Stephen King part in Shooter Jennings’ album, “Hierophant.”

    Great writeup Triggerman!

       0 likes

  • “If Saving Country Music was attempted to be censored, I would move the site to an offshore server. If the offshore server was shut down, I would write my blogs out long hand and broadcast them through a bullhorn on street corners.”

    Uh, that would be you being censored. That would, by any definition, be being censored. It’s not you “not allow[ing] that to happen” – it’s you reacting to it. In a good way, I guess, but I think you’re mixed up on that point.

       0 likes

    • I am not going to get into semantics arguments over the definitions of censorship, or worry about folks using grammatical shell games in an attempt to refute my argument. The simple fact is, the fear that Google, Facebook, and others are using to protect their business model and revenue is shameful, and though I oppose SOPA, I oppose lying to people to create fear as well.

         0 likes

      • I don’t get you. What semantic arguments? I’m talking about things you wrote.

           0 likes

      • What you just did was tantamount to “I don’t care if you say 2 + 2 = 4, I say it’s 5, and I won’t let your semantic grammatical games stop me.”

        If you were forced to go offshore, you will have been censored. This is not an opinion. This is a fact.

           0 likes

        • Look LT, it doesn’t matter, and frankly, I don’t have the truck for your intellectual exercises. I have not been forced onto an offshore server, and there’s nothing in SOPA that would ever either force or require me to do so. It was a hypothetical I laid out autonomous to the SOPA argument to illustrate that no matter what laws are passed, I will do everything I can to keep my website in operation. Furthermore, the passing of SOPA is a hypothetical, and so are the ways it will be interpreted and enforced. Let’s stay on message man.

             0 likes

          • Well, okay. We’ll ignore that part.

            I think there are a couple different things going on here, and the problem is their being combined. Much of your take on what the big franchises are doing is really separate from the issue of the bill itself, which you oppose anyway. So there ya go.

            The fact that we already have members of Congress withdrawing support – today – means to me that the blackout exercise is working. It’s not solely responsible, of course, but I think it’s part of it, and I support it.

            There your go. Keep on,

            LT

               0 likes

        • Alright, for the sake of argument, I have changed the phrase “If Saving Country Music was attempted to be censored”, to “If Saving Country Music was censored”, reflecting your fair argument that by having to move to an offshore server, than censorship has already happened.

             0 likes

  • Um, you might want to reread the law. If you posted something that a reader found objectionable, they could flag you. Then your isp could step in and shut you down. It will not pass, anyway, but you should watch your freedom.

       0 likes

    • Fear. That is the tactic you just used against me. Unfortunately, I’m not afraid.

      Don’t you worry about me watching my “freedom”. I am mindful of it at every moment. You might want to watch who is lying to you.

      Regardless of what regulations and restrictions they put on me, like water, I will find a way. Like I said up top, I will worry when the men show up with guns.

         0 likes

  • Thanks for posting this, Trig. Today on facebook everyone is talking about it and I was wary. I had a feeling it might be a storm in a teacup.

    An American friend recently alerted me about some horrific law that was about to pass here in NZ regarding food safety. Supposedly, this law would have the old neighbourhood lady who shares fresh produce from her garden with her neighbours chucked in the slammer as she didn’t have a food safety certificate. This propaganda was being circulated in the states! Everyone on facebook was circulating partitions etc …. and it turns out it’s just a new law being passed that will be more stringent with professional food vendors. You know, cleanliness and hygiene and the stuff that helps prevent one getting food poisoning. The media love to engage in these fear tactics to create a story where there isn’t one.

       0 likes

  • I’ve said this on facebook. The way to stopping piracy isn’t through legislation. It’s by changing the current distribution methods that are failing. For movies, the theatrical release model needs to change. Going to the theater needs to be a niche product similar to buying vinyl. Also for both music and movie retail releases, I think they need to start including something in the release that cannot be duplicated in a file. For instance, take Rachel Brooke’s recent Late Night Lover 7″. If you bought a physical copy, the package and extras were great. I even had a personalized note from Rachel. Not all artists can do that, but that’s the idea. I don’t know what the answer would be for everyone, but it’s out there. Record Labels and movie industries just have to work at finding their audiences again instead of holding on to dying distribution models.

       1 likes

    • Holy shit, a proactive approach that tries to find solutions instead of polarizing the public for political expediency?

      Something neither side of the SOPA debate is talking about is that music sales last year actually stabilized and ticked up slightly, after a dozen years of double digit losses. It was helped in part by vinyl sales jumping 36%, just like Rachel’s “Late Night Lover” that you speak of. The proponents of SOPA don’t want you to know that, because they want you to think the industry needs this law to stay alive, and that piracy is the reason they are dying (which they are not, at least at the moment). It’s not that creativity could solve this problem, it’s that it is already. Let the market solve this. It’s already proving it can. Keep Uncle Sam out.

         0 likes

    • Damn you to hell, Facebook, for making me want to have a “like” button right here.

         0 likes

      • We’re working on developing one for comments.

           0 likes

  • The biggest thing one should look at is how Google is handling this. They black out their logo but keep their servie going. Why? It is all about money. They would lose millions in ad revenue by shutting down for the day. They care more about money being lost than so called freedoms being lost. These companies are scared of losing money by this passing, they dont give a shit about anything else. Google has gotten got red handed many times doing shady things but pay their way out. There is a reason why they are getting investigated. Dont be a blind sheep, open your eyes to everything and realize that Trig has made some good points on this.

       0 likes

  • I disagree. I think bills like this can cause a lot of trouble. Posting videos, music clips, etc… just to show people without label consent, etc… could be a big problem for any music site. People posting links to music in your comments could cause you to be black listed because you didn’t delete them or monitor past post and look for them.

    The mentality of it’ll matter to me when they show up on my doorstep just doesn’t work in the internet world. I do think it is irritating that sites do the black list thing…mainly because sites I use a lot are not available to me today. I think that’s the point of this protest. What if some of the websites you enjoy suddenly were no longer available to you because of some clause in these bills. Said websites would never be available to you again because the government said so. This targets piracy mainly but there is a lot of wiggle room in stuff like this.

       0 likes

    • “posting links to music in your comments could cause you to be black listed because you didn’t delete them or monitor past post and look for them.”

      Fear. And I’m not buying it. I’m also not saying there isn’t a slight chance this couldn’t happen in certain extreme cases if the law passes. That’s why I oppose it.

      I don’t like that word “could.” It’s clear skies down in Texas right now, but I COULD be struck down by lightning. It is extremely unlikely, but it is also possible. Like a conspiracy theory, you don’t have to prove anything, you just have to create doubt, which is a much easier litmus test for an argument.

      On January 13th, the portion of SOPA that required ISP’s to restrict access to sites that were deemed to have pirated material was taken out of the bill. In other words, even sites who exclusively deal in pirated material, like The Pirate Bay, etc., would still be up, and by law, could still be seen by users. The only thing that would be restricted would be payments to and from advertisers like Google.

      Again, the worst that could happen to Saving Country Music or any other site, is that payment from outside ad revenue sources like Google would be restricted. The reason Google doesn’t want you to know that this portion was stricken out of the bill, is because that is the SOPA opposition’s biggest weapon. And because the propaganda machine got rolling while that important portion was still in the bill. But the fact is, it’s no longer there. The people spoke, and for once, Congress listened. But Google/Facebook is still going with their original propaganda argument as if the bill was never changed. If the ISP restriction provision was still in the bill, I would have participated in the blackout. And it was my plan to until I heard that news.

         0 likes

      • Yeah I read that certain portions have been taken out. It has went through some various modifications (it’s also hard to keep up with what is in and out at this point…as various sites are reporting different things) As far as I know though this portion is still in. This portion is the loophole I was discussing:

        Section 102:

        A service provider shall take technically feasible and reasonable measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) that is subject to the order…Such actions shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within five days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order.

        Again my point stands true as explained in this article. Article link:

        http://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/stop-online-piracy-act/

        How they analyzed it (there breakdown not mine):

        What this means is … payment processors notified by the Department of Justice have a set time frame by which they have to suspend their services for specific merchants –– specifically their websites –– that are found to support foreign countries infringing on copyrights or intellectual property rights. The far reaching extension of this law’s language is that payment processors have to shut down their operations on some of their customers’ sites if a violation is found. The simple purpose of this law would appear to be that it seeks to cut into the piracy operation at its most basic level. Foreign countries set up sites that take payments for materials that they do not have the copyright for, so the law shuts down that ability to take payment. But the law’s so broad that it opens up loopholes, wherein payment processors can be held accountable for violations their individual customers might not even be aware of –– such as copyrighted materials posted in a business’ message forums or feedback thread in a product review area.

        This piece is the trouble in that description:

        But the law’s so broad that it opens up loopholes, wherein payment processors can be held accountable for violations their individual customers might not even be aware of –– such as copyrighted materials posted in a business’ message forums or feedback thread in a product review area.

        If section 102 has been removed I can’t find any place where it has said that particular portion has been removed. I mean I agree it is a fear tactic. I also don’t see a bill like this passing anytime. I’m just pointing out some of the dangers.

           0 likes

        • OK, I see. The thing is, I am not a payment processor. There are only a few entities that are, paypal being the primary one. I’m not saying paypal has a right to be impinged on either, but this specific issue is one of the issues I have with the bill. What it is not is some gaping loophole that can result in hundreds of independent websites getting shut down surreptitiously.

          I’ve seen folks say this is going to shut down Wikipedia and destroy independent music. Maybe a certain draft of the bill at some point could have been construed that way, but the opposition has been very lazy at reacting to positive moves being made in the legislation. Stuff was changed 6 days ago, and it seems like only this afternoon did opposition entities start to explain other difficulties beyond the DNS provisions, after sites like this and others started calling them out on it.

             0 likes

  • And now you’ve just gone too far.

    “Nowhere in the current SOPA legislation is there any wording, directly or indirectly, that talks about censoring anything, and furthermore, the US government does not have jurisdiction over offshore servers even if it did…”

    I’m sorry, but now you are the one spreading disinformation. Because you have some odd notion that censorship *within the U.S.* isn’t censorship – cuz you can always go offshore! ! – is just so wrongheaded that I’m lost at where to start.

    I’m asking you to rethink what you’ve done here.

    * I posted this on FB, and wanted to post it here to, for continuity.

       0 likes

    • LT. My friend. You’re making crazy talk. I’m not “spreading disinformation”. We have an honest and fair disagreement about the nature and definition of “censorship”, and that’s fine. But the whole exercise has nothing to do with SOPA, it has to do with a hypothetical I laid out.

         0 likes

      • Yes – addressed in comment up top.

           0 likes

        • Ok, I think we are on the same page here. Sorry if I came across as rude or jumpy. Maybe I should have been more clear on separating my rant on censorship in general, with my rant about the propaganda opposing SOPA.

             0 likes

  • And my last comment from FFB (I’ll keep my comments he if there are to be more).

    I don’t see how Wikipedia doesn’t have a point. This point:

    “At a minimum, this means that any service that hosts user generated content is going to be under enormous pressure to actively monitor and filter that content. That’s a huge burden, and worse for services that are just getting started – the YouTubes of tomorrow that are generating jobs today.”

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/10/sopa-hollywood-finally-gets-chance-break-internet

    I’m sure you have valid points about big internet franchises. I’m not speaking t
    o that.

       0 likes

    • But the teeth of that provision was taken out on January 13th. Furthermore I OPPOSE THE LAW. I just also oppose the fact that the Google/Facebook/Wiki superpac has not revised their propaganda machine to reflect the Jan 13th changes to the law and are lying to people to protect their revenue streams.

         0 likes

  • Great post. I don’t agree with it entirely, but great nonetheless. I think the point to the SOPA opposition was more than just opposing SOPA. Of course no one wants their domain shut down or a third party domain where their content resides shut down. Of course people want to be able to post YouTube videos of their kids dancing to Lady GaGa without “The Man” being able to take it down.Of course the mega corps would push the boundaries of the law to sue people and take down sites that they considered to be in violation of the law. All of that is fine and good but I think the main point of the opposition is that finally, with the help of some hugely popular sites on our side, we can actually “win”. It’s hard for the peasants to win when it comes to these kinds of things so that aspect of it is exciting. Granted, we have a lot of help from mega corps like Google but sometimes you got to fight fire with. When the hotest fires are willing to help your cause, you sometimes sell out in order to come out on top. In this case, I think the sell out is for the right reasons.

    In regards to your points about not allowing yourself to be censored, maybe they can’t silence you but they can certainly make it a lot harder for you to get out your message should they choose to come after you. The point of it all is, you shouldn’t have to run and hide to say what you want to say how you want to say it. Anyhow, excellent writeup on another way to look at the issue.

       0 likes

    • I agree Owen, this fight has raised a lot of awareness and knowledge on the subject of the internet and censorship, and you’re totally right, regardless of how we might feel about certain big corporations, sometimes it may be smart to look the other way on certain things and join forces to fight for the greater good.

         0 likes

  • Longtime reader, first time poster. You’re absolutely correct on one point…that this is largely about money even on the opposition side (especially Google). But sites like reddit, wikipedia and organizations like the EFF aren’t blacking out because they’re worried about ad revenue (wikipedia doesn’t even have ads), they’re blacking out because this is a fundamentally flawed and shitty piece of legislation that was more or less handwritten by the content industry. Even with the DNS provision shelved (for now), which had some serious security implications, the bill still contains some major violations of due process and first amendment rights. There’s also the little provision that can turn a single copyright violation, a civil matter, into a criminal felony. But when the feds come knocking I suppose we could all just take the Triggerman route and go out in a blaze of glory, probably killing several agents in the process who were just doing their job so they could go home to their families.

    Is piracy a problem? Yes. But the real problem is that the content industry is directly responsible for their own predicament. For years they fought tooth and nail against new media distribution methods provided by the internet. When the public wasn’t given what they asked for – an easy way to access all the content they owned on any device they owned – they turned to the easiest solution to do so – piracy. Now you have a whole generation of individuals who have been getting their media free, the majority of which are not going to go back to paying just because the industry has made a few concessions and provided better ways to access it (streaming services, etc). So now that the RIAA and MPAA F-ed up their own business they’re buying a piece of legislation to try and go back to the glory days of 1999. The problem is that SOPA will do jack shit to actually combat piracy and hurt legitimate people and business (the same way that most gun control laws don’t affect the criminals, just the law abiding citizens).

    Done with my rant. If you’re looking for a good article on the subject check out this one on ars:
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/even-without-dns-provisions-sopa-and-pipa-remain-fatally-flawed.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

       0 likes

    • I agree, the legislation is flawed, and that is why I oppose it. I just tend to bristle at the way some folks have used abject fear to promote the opposition. As soon as I saw the DNS provision taken out, my fear subsided significantly. Of course there will be unintended consequences and problems. That happens with every law. A couple of times, this site has been registered with Google as a spam attack site accidentally. It sucked, I had to jump through hoops to clear my name, and that is just one of the prices you pay to do business on the internet. And if SOPA passes, I’m sure there will be similar instances. But running around saying Wiki and Google will permanently disappear is nonsense.

         0 likes

  • outlaw…

       0 likes

  • I gotta say I’m with you 99% of the time and rarely comment here. But this is the 1% I’m scratching my head. I could care less if you want to participate or not in the strike. I personally think half the people striking are in it for publicity (Wikipedia takes down only the non-mobile side, then tells you how to disable it… and moreover keeps up their for profit wikia sites.. lame)

    But how you can not read censorship out of:
    “Authorizes the Attorney General (AG) to seek a court order against a U.S.-directed foreign Internet site committing or facilitating online piracy to require the owner, operator, or domain name registrant, or the site or domain name itself if such persons are unable to be found, to cease and desist further activities constituting specified intellectual property offenses under the federal criminal code including criminal copyright infringement, unauthorized fixation and trafficking of sound recordings or videos of live musical performances, the recording of exhibited motion pictures, or trafficking in counterfeit labels, goods, or services.”

    It has nothing to do with your server. They cut you off at the domain name. Sure re-register… but it is, by definition, censorship.

    The whole rant about I’ll move, I’ll write, I’ll shout it with a bullhorn has no bearing on the SOPA issue. It just means you’re passionate. Get in line.. we all are when it comes to our art. But I’m sure as shit not going stand around, piss and moan about wikipedia’s propaganda… I’m going to stop this stupid shit before it becomes a law.

    All this propoganda (and it’s out there) has got you seeing red to the point where you’re confusing the government taking away your rights vs. the government just not giving a shit about your rights.

    SOPA isn’t the thing that’s going to ultimately censor small sites like us. It’s going to be the foot that breaks the door down so they can rape my kids later.

       0 likes

    • hope none of that came off rude. I’m not trying to fight fire with fire by any means. My choice to support anti-SOPA side has nothing to do with fear. It has everything to do with looking ahead.

         0 likes

    • No Tank, not rude at all, and you’re right about the provision you quoted above. However, that provision was removed Jan. 13th from the bill. Unfortunately the Google/Facebook/Wiki/Whoever propaganda juggernaut did not inform people of that, they have moved forward like that is still in the bill.

      Dantheman posted this above and I have been reposting it, because it gives a good explanation, and also explains that even with the Jan 13th changed, the bill is still flawed.

      http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/even-without-dns-provisions-sopa-and-pipa-remain-fatally-flawed.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

         0 likes

  • …all i know is that if this SOPA or PIPA or w/e cockamamie law gets passed and in any way screws with my free porn,i’m gonna be seriously irritated.

       0 likes

    • what lunchbox said. good one. any the ways, everything is about the money. or sex. sex and money rule the roost. if the stupid bill passes it’s the tiny hole in the damn that eventually will lead to to some really nasty ass things down the road. that my friends is something you can count on. money, sex, and the incremental loss of freedom.

         0 likes

      • lol,my comment was goofs…still though,who’ll think of the devients?!?!

           0 likes

  • That was the most patriotic article you have ever written. I just had a red white and blue tear roll down my face.

       0 likes

  • I think in this case the enemy of your enemy is your friend. Of course google is in it for the money, but thats just the way life is; theres no altruism in corporations. It just happens that its for the right side. Just like these “fashion accessory causes”. They are stupid, but this one is headed in the right direction, albeit led by half truths and misinformation. The bottom line is that the RIAA will abuse any power given to it and that if someone wants to do right by the bands they listen to, then they will do it whether or not there is a law telling them to and vise versa.

       0 likes

    • Well you know, I’m trying to court the “Red Blooded ‘Merican” Archetype ;)

         0 likes

      • Somehow my reply to this comment was meant to go to the comment above and vice versa. Anyway…

           0 likes

  • I don’t understand the furor in which you are attacking the opposition to a bill that you yourself do not support. What the fuck is the point?

    And by the way, the clincher is that you could have your site taken down without notice and without the courtesy of defending yourself….if something that somebody may feel slighly resembles something similar to something copyrighted.

    Yea, we get it, the whole “let them pry my freedom from my cold dead hands” gig….but c’mon now. This whole think stinks to high heaven.

       0 likes

    • The point is to be honest with people. Yeah, 90% of the time people are polarized on one side or the other: democrat or republican, left or right, rich or poor, rural or urban, when in truth 90% of the time the truth lies somewhere in the middle, just like with SOPA. Yeah, I’m against it. I’m also against big internet companies banding together and misconstruing facts to induce fear.

      “And by the way, the clincher is that you could have your site taken down without notice and without the courtesy of defending yourself.

      Yeah, that’s already happened to me. Twice. And you know who did it? Google, without the power of any law. Twice this site was “reported” as an attack site, possibly by people that had a bone to pick instead of being worried about a real threat. So whenever anybody came here, they were warned to turn back or their computers might be infected. And I had to just through all sorts of hoops, and eventually the warning was taken down. Google is already doing what they’re warning us might happen with SOPA.

      Sorry if my opinions don’t fit in some nice pigeon hole, but when somebody is being straight up with you, they rarely do.

         0 likes

      • I don’t think Wikipedia did it solely for the money because they don’t advertise. They may have a few corporate sponsors, but not to the extent of other major websites. It wouldn’t make google go under, but it would affect the advertising and the money they make. Of course they are worried about the money, but it doesn’t change the fact that this is a piece of shit piece of legislation. Sites like Reddit will be greatly affected, and almost be forced to shut down due to being almost zero original content on their page. I fully support the blackout from all websites. It has made 11 senators rethink their position on the 2 bills. Fuck everything about this censorship bill. Today, as you probably already know, MegaUpload was shut down. Why? Because there are some albums or movies available to download? Well, there are also other things hosted on there than doesn’t infringe. Shutting them down for some copyrighted material would be like the feds shutting down NYC because there is a little crime committed. Good on you Google, Wikipedia, Reddit, Boing Boing, ect.

           0 likes

  • love it.

       0 likes

  • There’s another entity that operates for MONEY in the States. It’s the prison industry. I’m going to tell you from personal experience that you CAN in FACT be detained for an alleged crime which DID NOT OCCUR. You CAN be imprisoned until you finally get through the doors of the court room, a few times, eventually, or until you come up with, you guessed it, some MONEY.

    I have NOT read nor do I intend to read SOPA for myself. Reason; if the past decade of legislation is any indication, it simply doesn’t matter what it says in the publicly available copy. The lying and propoganda does not stop with the folks that oppose the bill. As with many key pieces of legislation in recent years, the specific wording, provisions, and amendments you are privy to are only designed to make you feel better about the bill’s passing. The problem is, at the last minute we will start to hear news stories of ‘obstructionist’ politics and partisan bickering. This is when the real LAW is being formed. Information becomes obscure and specifics then become impossible to keep track of. We the People simply have NO say at this point. All we can do is cheer or jeer.

    Triggerman, I commend you for standing up (alone perhaps?) and getting info for yourself! What I’m suggesting is that you don’t know any more than myself or any other fool, about the consequences of this law, intended or otherwise. We the People have NOTHING to do with the legislative process at it’s core. You and I are NOT in the loop. The most valuable point I’d take from this rant is that you choose to live FREE, PERIOD. Enjoy that while it lasts. Do your best to preserve it for future generations.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU

       0 likes

  • “Google and Facebook’s fight is not about censorship, it is about MONEY”
    This assumes that they derive wealth from royalties etc. There is something else at play. POWER, CONTROL. How much money would someone pay for an entity that already has us connected and all of our communications and web travel catalogued going as far back as the www itself? When the Occupy Wall Street protests began (3 days before the much maligned new facebook format), Facebook was automatically censoring my QUESTIONS from various ‘occupy’ pages. When I contacted the administrators, they told me the ‘spam filter’ was acting funny and they could see the post but were unable to make it public. In those initial days, the cry was for “solidarity”. My questions did not fit the format and for whatever reason, were blocked from sight. There are many little ‘glitches’ that would be very valuable to the folks that sit at eye-level on the pyramid. It IS after all, about MONEY.

       0 likes

  • Do we doubt the wisdom of our ruling class?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7mOaPnYYA

       0 likes

  • Good post. It reminds me of the Occupy protests. So many of the protesters interviewed on TV were so misinformed that they came off like the didn’t have a fucking clue what they were protesting. Seems like they jumped on a bandwagon because it was the cool thing to do.

       0 likes

    • This is nothing like the Occupy protests. You’re right on the part of how they mostly were misinformed. The blackout was not a protest. It was a tool to get the word out. Whether you like it or not, most people had no idea what SOPA/PIPA was before the blackout. Yesterday informed MANY people of what was going on. Would Trig have posted about SOPA if it weren’t for the blackout? Absolutely not. Which, in turn, proves that the blackout worked.

         0 likes

      • Also, this has nothing to do with being cool. Government is trying to intrude on the fucking internet. One of the highest forms of censorship is trying to be passed. If it’s the “cool” thing to do to not want my internet fucked with, then by god call me Cash. He sure as fuck wouldn’t have wanted this shit to pass. Get informed on the subject.

           0 likes

      • I’m not so sure I wouldn’t have posted about it if not for the blackout. I have been paying very close attention to SOPA and the internet piracy laws for a long time. The article I posted today about women & vinyl I had planned way before the blackout. This article was not, and yes, I hope I did help raise awareness.

        I think it’s a good point to distinguish a awarness campaign from a protest, but many of the blackout participants referred to it as a protest, and took it to mean that for sure.

           0 likes

  • You continue to tell it like you see it Triggerman. I must say though, if you wait until the men with guns show up, it’s already too late.

       0 likes

    • The portion of that rant was to illustrate that regardless of what laws they pass, I personally will refuse to be censored. And if we all approach it with that same might, their laws are irrelevant.

         0 likes

      • That’s a great point. Keep up the good fight!

           0 likes

Leave a comment

George Miguel
Del Maguey
Best Of Lists
Old Soul Radio Show

Categories

Archives